[HumanaeVitae]

Can we use this argument to extend to smoking? Should smoking be illegal by this criteria?

That's a prudential consideration. In other words, is trying to ban smoking worse than the smoking itself?

The same question applies here to sodomy laws. Is trying to regulate sodomy worse than not trying to regulate sodomy? That's the question that should be placed before the people of Texas, and should not be decided by a bunch of robed pervert-hugging elitists in the judiciary.

If the people of Texas want to repeal that law, I can say nothing against it. But there is no "right" to sodomy. Period.

[Roscoe]

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendVIIIs10.html

[steve-b]

That's a prudential consideration.

To some people (e.g. Clowntoon wondering what he can do today without getting caught and punished), these issues boil down to "a prudential consideration".

To principled people, they boil down to matters of principle.